U.S. proposed new language in effort to reach Gaza hostage-ceasefire deal
U.S. proposed new language in effort to reach Gaza hostage-ceasefire deal
You're viewing a single thread.
The article states Hamas did not accept the recent ceasefire deal. Didn't Israel reject it?
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-june-25-2024/
MR MILLER: I think it confirms two things. Number one, as the IPC itself said, we need to get a ceasefire. And that is the best way – bar none – to alleviate the humanitarian situation on the ground and alleviate the very real, very tragic of the – situation of the Palestinian people. And that is why we are working every day to try to get a ceasefire. It’s why we were so disappointed that Hamas rejected the ceasefire proposal that was on the table that the United Nations Security Council and countries around the world endorsed.
...
QUESTION: Yeah. Also, do you have a written or public statement from Hamas stating that they don’t support the ceasefire, considering that according to you they were the ones who in previous months —
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: — proposed something similar?
MR MILLER: Yeah. They came back several weeks ago and rejected the proposal that was on the table in written – in written form. They gave us a written response that rejected the proposal that had been put forward by Israel, that the – that President Biden had outlined, that the United Nations Security Council and countries all around the world had endorsed. Obviously, we don’t make the text of that public, because these are very sensitive negotiations, but it was a written rejection and counter-proposal that came from Hamas.
Not that the original article wasn't proof enough. Additionally:
https://www.axios.com/2024/06/12/blinken-hamas-gaza-hostage-ceasefire-proposal
What he's saying: Speaking from Doha after meeting with the Prime Minister of Qatar, Blinken said: "Hamas proposed numerous changes to the proposal that was on the table. Some of the changes are workable and some are not."
He argued the deal currently under discussion is almost identical to the one Hamas itself proposed on May 6. "It was a deal that Israel accepted and the world was behind. Hamas could have answered with a single word: 'yes.'"
"Instead, they waited almost two weeks and then proposed more changes, a number of which go beyond positions it has previously presented and agreed to. As a result, the war will go on and more people will suffer," Blinken said.
"It's time for the haggling to stop and the ceasefire to start. Israel accepted the proposal as it is, Hamas didn't. It is clear what needs to happen," he said.
National security adviser Jake Sullivan said later Wednesday that "many of the proposed changes in Hamas' response are minor and not unanticipated. Others differ more substantially from what was outlined in the UN security council resolution" endorsing the deal, which passed on Tuesday.
Israel did not sign that proposal. They did not put it forward either. This entire statement is incorrect.
I'm sorry your opinion doesn't change what happened. Hamas rejected the cease fire. You can quibble about whether you think it was put forward by whatever party, whomever it was put forward by, it was rejected by Hamas.
hamas says yes to negotiations, Israel rejects
I guess I'll post this again...
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj77j7ppj52o.amp
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said that if a ceasefire plan backed by the US and UN does not progress, Hamas will be to blame.
Mr Blinken reiterated his call for Hamas to accept the plan as outlined by President Biden 11 days ago.
He said the onus was on “one guy” hiding “ten storeys underground in Gaza” to make the casting vote, referring to Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.
Mr Blinken said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had “reaffirmed his commitment” to the proposal when they held talks in Jerusalem on Monday.
Mr Netanyahu has not publicly endorsed what Mr Biden outlined nor said whether it matches an Israeli proposal on which Mr Biden’s statement was based.
Mr Blinken described as a “hopeful sign” Hamas’s response to a resolution passed by the UN Security Council on Monday supporting what Mr Biden had announced.
The resolution noted that Israel had accepted what Mr Biden had presented and called on Hamas to do so as well.
Hamas issued a statement on Tuesday welcoming “what was included” in the resolution.
But Mr Blinken said Hamas’s response was not conclusive, adding that that “what counts” is what is said by the Hamas leadership in Gaza, “and that’s what we don’t have”.
If the proposal did not proceed then it was “on them”, he said.
And I'll tack on, why had Hamas rejected in written form the proposal and responded with a counter proposal?
Additionally, your source says they signal support. No where did it say Israel rejected it. Even from your article:
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in Tel Aviv to meet Israeli officials, called this a "hopeful sign" but said it was not conclusive.
More important "is the word coming from Gaza and from the Hamas leadership in Gaza. That’s what counts, and that’s what we don’t have yet," Blinken told reporters in Tel Aviv.
You are lying. Also, considering it was a cease fire, not negotiations, that was proposed, this seems like a feeble attempt to obfuscate the situation.
Got it, only hamas bad Israel can do no wrong
Hamas accepted the ceasefire.
Israel never signed it to begin with.
Hmm my sources don't seem to share that opinion.
"
Netanyahu stated he was "prepared to make a partial deal—this is no secret—that will return to us some of the people," referring to the approximately 120 hostages still detained in Gaza. "But we are committed to continuing the war after a pause, in order to complete the goal of eliminating Hamas. I'm not willing to give up on that," he added.
These remarks come as a surprise after U.S. President Joe Biden presented the plan as an Israeli initiative, referred to by some in Israel as "Netanyahu's deal." His comments could further strain U.S.-Israel relations, as the U.S., Israel's primary ally, has made significant diplomatic efforts to push for the ceasefire.
"
Political bluster does not negate what internal negotiations are resulting in. This does not at all disprove my sources. I'm sorry, Hamas is holding this one up. As stated, everyone was waiting for Hamas to sign. If your assertions about Israel hold any weight, Hamas really could have stuck it to them and signed the cease fire, forcing Israel to either back up it's bluster or move forward. But they didn't.
And these are the facts.
Israel publicly stated they would not abide by the ceasefire.
You said Israel signed the ceasefire deal which is not a fact.
I didn't say anything. You'd have to quote me, which you can't :)
You have a problem with what Blinken and the resolution itself are saying, and they say Israel accepted the deal. Take it up with them. I'm done with you, this exact situation was discussed with you in a previous thread by another user. This is a bad faith effort to muddy the waters, and I reject this kind of discussion.
Goodbye.
Edit: since reading the original article is not a thing here:
Driving the news: Earlier this week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu walked back the proposal and told Israel's Channel 14 that he is interested in a "partial deal" with Hamas that will free "some of the hostages" held in Gaza and allow Israel to continue fighting in the enclave.
A day later, under pressure from the U.S., Qatar and hostages families, Netanyahu corrected his comments and recommitted to the proposal.
But if it were up to the above user, this wouldn't have been mentioned.